You can't post this.

[Jolly]

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

Maybe @Jolly prefers government regulations to free market mechanisms.

A totally unfettered free market is predatory and unsustainable.

But you knew that already...

[Mik]

It is not regulation that is the problem but excessive and unnecessary regulation that stifles rather than supports a healthy marketplace.

[Doctor Phibes]

The whole idea of YouTube is such a new concept, and most of the time it works really well. OK, it's not perfect, but you can't legislate perfection.

[Axtremus]

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

Maybe @Jolly prefers government regulations to free market mechanisms.

A totally unfettered free market is predatory and unsustainable.

But you knew that already...

Sure, go ahead and tell me what government regulations you would like to put in place in this instance.

[Jolly]

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

Maybe @Jolly prefers government regulations to free market mechanisms.

A totally unfettered free market is predatory and unsustainable.

But you knew that already...

Sure, go ahead and tell me what government regulations you would like to put in place in this instance.

Why waste my time? We know where you stand. We know where I stand.

[Axtremus]

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

Maybe @Jolly prefers government regulations to free market mechanisms.

A totally unfettered free market is predatory and unsustainable.

But you knew that already...

Sure, go ahead and tell me what government regulations you would like to put in place in this instance.

Why waste my time? We know where you stand. We know where I stand.

I don't know where you stand. For example, you haven't really say whether you prefer government regulations to free market mechanisms in this instance, much less articulating any policy remedy you would like to see.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

Don’t like YouTube?
Host the video on your own website.
Or use one of many alternatives; here’s a list to get you started: https://medium.com/@breadnbeyond/12-finest-youtube-alternatives-to-find-out-whats-not-on-youtube-cdb6109ff4d3

Uh, no.

Choosing a monetized content platform isn't like buying free-range eggs. YouTube algorithm changes can affect unemployment benefit numbers, and how many small businesses go under each quarter. They're that big. And they do this by marketing one way and acting another.

Say you signed a contract with a marketing company to promote your business's next event. They agree to do X, Y, and Z to promote it on such-and-such days, provided you give them the assets to use for the promotion. Your company spends hours and hours on the assets, because the event is your business's largest revenue source. Now, three days into the promotion, the marketing company ghosts you. They don't return calls, there's no one over there to speak with, and there's no promotion whatsoever, now and forever. You're officially screwed.

That's pretty much the experience creators and small publishers have with YouTube. They can spend years building up a following, and their revenue from their videos can fall to 0 any time they wake up in the morning. YouTube markets themselves as a place where creators get paid for their work. They never mention that the algorithm can destroy your financial future if you go all in on the platform—because going all in is exactly what they want you to do.

And before you attack this, I'd like to know the largest YouTube platform you've created content for and get back to me on how much you think you know.

[Doctor Phibes]

I'd definitely be in favour of more transparency and openness from these sites regarding how they handle these things.

[Larry]

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

Maybe @Jolly prefers government regulations to free market mechanisms.

A totally unfettered free market is predatory and unsustainable.

But you knew that already...

Sure, go ahead and tell me what government regulations you would like to put in place in this instance.

Why waste my time? We know where you stand. We know where I stand.

I don't know where you stand. For example, you haven't really say whether you prefer government regulations to free market mechanisms in this instance, much less articulating any policy remedy you would like to see.

Funny how you crow about free market mechanisms in this instance as if you have some sort of principled view yet when it comes to something YOU favor, such as health care, you become a fucking communist and want the government to step in and take it over completely.

[Axtremus]

@Aqua-Letifer I won't attack what you wrote above at all. I know there is no guarantee regarding YouTube's algorithm, or any platform's algorithm for that matter ... Amazon, Google, Apple, FaceBook, Microsoft, none of them gives any guarantee about how their search or recommendation algorithm would rank any product/content.

So what do you want to do? Is there a specific policy you'd like to propose to deal with the above?

[Aqua Letifer]

@Axtremus said in You can't post this.:

@Aqua-Letifer I won't attack what you wrote above at all. I know there is no guarantee regarding YouTube's algorithm, or any platform's algorithm for that matter ... Amazon, Google, Apple, FaceBook, Microsoft, none of them gives any guarantee about how their search or recommendation algorithm would rank any product/content.

So what do you want to do? Is there a specific policy you'd like to propose to deal with the above?

There needs to be at least a process within YouTube for dealing with censorship outside of "this video triggered the algorithm in ways we won't explain to you, and no you can't talk to anybody about it." More humans have to get involved for starters. Which means the process would take a lot longer and there'd be a backlog. Good! Only the most egregious stuff should be censored anyway, so severity and number of infractions should dictate what they choose to follow up with.

Really, though, YouTube had its fun, and what we truly need is some competition.

[Jolly]

@Doctor-Phibes said in You can't post this.:

I'd definitely be in favour of more transparency and openness from these sites regarding how they handle these things.

And that's what most of the content creators went. Just give them some firm rules and don't keep changing the goalposts.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Jolly said in You can't post this.:

@Doctor-Phibes said in You can't post this.:

I'd definitely be in favour of more transparency and openness from these sites regarding how they handle these things.

And that's what most of the content creators went. Just give them some firm rules and don't keep changing the goalposts.

Problem with that is that it is political, to some extent. Companies don't want to have their ads associated with the Bad People of the Month, so they have to move the goalposts necessarily to ensure that.